Singapore PM Lee Hsien Loong tells TOC defamation trial he hopes family feud can be repaired

While his relationship with his siblings is “not in the best state” and “animosity is evident” on their end, Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said he and his wife Ho Ching do not want the family feud to continue.

“I hope against hope that one day, matters can be repaired. But it’s one of those things that happen in life and this too shall pass,” he said on Monday during the first day of his defamation trial.

Lee is suing Terry Xu, the chief editor of sociopolitical website The Online Citizen (TOC), for libel over an article published in August last year titled “PM Lee’s wife Ho Ching weirdly shares article on cutting ties with family members”. It referred to an article she posted on Facebook that was titled “Here is why sometimes it is okay to cut ties with toxic family members”.

Since 2017, Lee has been embroiled in a dispute with his siblings – Dr Lee Wei Ling and Lee Hsien Yang – over the fate of their family home at 38 Oxley Road after the death of their father, Singapore’s founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.

Explainer | Why are heirs of Singapore’s founding father Lee Kuan Yew feuding?

Lee is seeking damages including aggravated damages, an injunction to restrain Xu from publishing or disseminating the allegations, and costs.

The TOC article, Lee’s lawyers have said, contains false allegations repeated from his siblings that gravely injure his character and reputation. It also referenced a Facebook post written by Dr Lee earlier that year, in which she said that the prime minister misled their father into believing the Oxley Road house had been gazetted by the Singapore government.

Xu named Lee’s siblings as third parties in the lawsuit but will not be calling them to testify. Xu’s lawyer, Lim Tean, said on Monday that it was likely Xu would be discontinuing third party proceedings against them as well.

Lim spent Monday morning cross-examining the prime minister, who is represented by a team of five lawyers led by Senior Counsel Davinder Singh. The lawyers previously faced off about two months ago when Lee’s defamation suit against blogger Leong Sze Hian went to trial.

When Lim questioned the prime minister on whether he and his wife thought his siblings were “judging and gossiping about you”, Lee replied: “I have a disagreement with my siblings, unfortunately, and our relations are not in the best state. Everyone knows that.”

He later added: “I think animosity is evident on one side from my siblings … I do not think on (my and my wife’s) side, we really want this to continue or hold anything against them.”

Lee Suet Fern suspended over misconduct in handling Lee Kuan Yew’s will

Referring to the TOC article, Lim said the feud between the prime minister and his siblings was “obvious”. Lee responded that he had detached himself from the issue by selling the Oxley Road property to his brother and recusing himself from the government’s handling of the property.

“I have never done Facebook posts nor criticised them publicly. I have not said anything other than ministerial statements,” he said.

“Your wife has no animosity to your siblings?” Lim questioned. “Indeed. I’m not speaking on her behalf but I believe so,” Lee replied.

The lawyer then asked: “Why is it that you did not invite them for Chinese New Year after your father died?” Senior Counsel Singh objected to the question and Justice Audrey Lim agreed that the question was not relevant, reminding Lim to stick to his client’s defence.

Lim also pressed Lee to answer why he chose not to sue his siblings, adding that it was “understandable” that Xu thought he could refer to what they said.

“It is not understandable,” Lee replied. “What I’ve explained in Parliament is that not anyone can say anything about the house. It’s not carte blanche for anyone else to use that to spread allegations and further defame me.”

When Lim asked if he meant that journalists cannot report on his siblings’ allegations, he said they could “report anything subject to the laws of defamation”.

The lawyer probed him further on how his character and reputation were injured which would lead to loss and damages. In response, Lee said the TOC article “made very grave allegations against me” and was “read by a substantial number of people”.

Singapore election: voters deny PAP easy ride, deliver hard truths

Lim then asked the prime minister about his performance in the July election. “You did very well in the last General Election, did you not?” asked Lim, who was also a GE candidate with the political party Peoples Voice.

“I won the elections,” Lee said, adding that it was “not a referendum on 38 Oxley Road”.

“The GE is a test of your integrity and reputation, is it not?” the lawyer questioned. “If counsel wants to go in this direction, in 2015 (the People’s Action Party) won 69 per cent. In 2020, we won 61 per cent of the popular vote. I do not accept that it’s because of the house but if I accept counsel’s argument, the house did a lot of harm,” Lee said.

Under cross-examination, Lee also revealed that he had not read Ho’s Facebook post that led to the TOC article.

“I would have gone to read what my wife said but she didn’t say anything. TOC said she shared it. My wife reads often and shares widely. I have full confidence in her judgment,” he added.

Lim then asked Lee if it was reasonable for anyone reading Ho post, given the background and context of the dispute, to draw the inference that it was a commentary on his family’s dispute. Lee said he disagreed with that statement. 

When Ho Ching posts on Facebook, Singapore pays attention. Is that a problem?

Opening statements

Before the cross examination on Monday, both parties tendered their opening statements to the court. A summary of Lee’s case is as follows: 

-Readers of the TOC article will think that Lee misled his father into thinking the government would gazette the Oxley Road house and it was futile for the elder Lee to keep his direction to demolish it.

-They will also think he caused the elder Lee to consider other alternatives to demolition and change his will to bequeath the house to the prime minister.

-Readers will believe that the late Lee removed the prime minister as an executor and trustee of his will after learning in late 2013 that the government did not gazette the property.

Why Southeast Asia is fascinated with political sibling rivalries

A summary of Xu’s defence is as follows: 

-The allegedly defamatory statements, when read in the context of the whole article, meant it was ironic for Ho to share the post “given the publicised poor relationship” between Lee and his siblings.

-Readers will know it was Ho who shared the post and the “so-called irony” had nothing to do with Lee.

The trial continues on Tuesday morning with Lee returning to the witness box. He will be the only plaintiff witness.

Read the original article at Today Online